Costcutter Supermarkets Group Ltd v Vaish & Anor [2024] EWHC 152 (KB) (29 January 2024)

Costcutter Supermarkets Group Ltd v Vaish & Anor [2024] EWHC 152 (KB) (29 January 2024)

Clause 19.2 does not exclude or limit the claimant's primary right to recover a debt for goods delivered; it only limits liability for damages arising from breach of contract. The trial judge erred in construing the clause to limit debt claims. The judge was entitled to rely on the defendants' spreadsheet as evidence of sums owed, and there was no basis to overturn the factual finding on quantum.

Citation
[2024] EWHC 152 (KB)
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Costcutter Supermarkets Group Limited; First Defendant/first Respondent: Ameet Kumar Vaish; Second Defendant/second Respondent: Pradeep Kumar Vaish
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 January 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / High Court (king's Bench Division) Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; cross-appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Limitation of Liability Clauses, Construction of Contracts, Debt Claims Vs Damages, Burden of Proof, Factual Findings on Evidence
Contract Law Commercial Law Limitation of Liability Clauses Construction of Contracts Debt Claims Vs Damages Burden of Proof Factual Findings on Evidence

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Costcutter Supermarkets Group Limited

Claimant/appellant

Ameet Kumar Vaish

First Defendant/first Respondent

Pradeep Kumar Vaish

Second Defendant/second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / High Court (king's Bench Division) Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether limitation of liability clause (clause 19.2) in franchise agreements precludes recovery of debt claims for goods delivered
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in treating the limitation clause as applying to primary obligations to pay for goods
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge erred in finding for the claimant based on the defendants' spreadsheet as evidence of sums owed

Ratio Decidendi

Clause 19.2 does not exclude or limit the claimant's primary right to recover a debt for goods delivered; it only limits liability for damages arising from breach of contract. The trial judge erred in construing the clause to limit debt claims. The judge was entitled to rely on the defendants' spreadsheet as evidence of sums owed, and there was no basis to overturn the factual finding on quantum.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; cross-appeal dismissed

Orders

  • PV liable to Costcutter under the 2009 contract for £33,616.81 plus interest
  • AV liable to Costcutter under the 2012 contract for £84,110.78 plus interest